Motor vehicles and the transportation they provide are significant contributors to the convenience and quality of our lives. However, the advantages of motor vehicle travel are offset by the collisions that result in deaths, injuries, property damage and the escalating costs of health care, automobile insurance rates, and court proceedings. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) says that deaths and injuries from motor vehicle collisions are the leading cause of death for persons of every age from 6 to 27 years old.
Efforts to increase seat belt usage and reduce drunk driving have reduced the number of deaths and injuries from collisions over the last 10 years. However, much remains to be done as evident by the following NHTSA statistics: In 1997, 41,967 people were killed (one death every 13 minutes) in the estimated 6,764,000 police-reported motor vehicle traffic collisions, 3,399,000 people were injured, and 4,542,000 collisions involved property damage only. In recent years, the economic cost alone of motor vehicle collisions was more than $150.5 billion in a single year.
Collisions are usually attributable to a vehicle's improper speed or position. The intent of traffic laws is to prevent collisions by coordinating the safe movement of vehicles and pedestrians. However, the effectiveness of traffic laws depends heavily on the operator's good conscious to obey the laws and the operator's good judgement in executing the laws. Although the visible presence of police seems to improve the operator's conscious and judgement, the availability of police at any time and location is limited. What is needed is a way to physically reinforce adherence to the traffic laws to prevent vehicle-related collisions, and do so at any hour of the day and virtually under any driving conditions. This invention provides that capability.
Inventions that address speeding and traffic monitoring are known in prior art. Inventions by Turner (U.S. Pat. No. 4,102,156), James (U.S. Pat. No. 5,486,065), Thompson (U.S. Pat. No. 5,509,753), Wilson (U.S. Pat. No. 2,079,356), and Davies (WO94/19544) all provide a mechanical apparatus to invoke a reduction of vehicle speed. Inventions by Loeven (U.S. Pat. No. 5,041,828), Schweitzer (U.S. Pat. No. 5,066,950), Adkins (U.S. Pat. No. 5,742,699), and Geduld (U.S. Pat. No. 5,831,551) relate to measuring vehicle speed or determining traffic statistics. However, the primary focus of the Collision Avoidance System is significantly different than prior art. This invention involves the operation of a system to prevent collisions. Conversely, most of the prior art focuses on either the design of a mechanical apparatus to invoke a reduction of vehicle speed, the design of a vehicle speed measuring system or a system to collect vehicle traffic statistics. Inventions by Loeven (U.S. Pat. No. 5,041,828) and Schweitzer (U.S. Pat. No. 5,066,950) detail traffic monitoring systems but provide no means to correct the violating actions that are detected. The invention by Charbonnier (U.S. Pat. No. 2,647,132) has a limited focus on the speed measurement of a single target vehicle and subsequent action towards only that vehicle. The Collision Avoidance Systems focuses on situations with collision potential and not only monitors a single target vehicle but other vehicles, pedestrians, emergency vehicles, and trains, as well as school bus loading/unloading, and traffic congestion. Such multifaceted monitoring and control facilitates the coordination of traffic movement for safer travel and exceeds the limitation of prior art in focusing only on a single target vehicle. For example, the present invention may monitor a vehicle or pedestrian but may direct its output response toward one or more other vehicles, thus demonstrating a sensitivity to the traffic environment and not just a single vehicle. After all, collisions always involve more than a single object. None of the prior art has the complete and immediate capability to prevent collisions to the extent delivered by the Collision Avoidance System.
The sophistication of the Collision Avoidance System not only monitors a vehicle's speed and employs speed-reduction but can do so in proportion to the excessive speed of the vehicle. This serves as a more effective alert to the operator than the limited, static responses presented by the prior art. A significant number of collisions are attributable to moving violations but prior art largely neglects this issue. Unlike the Collision Avoidance System, the design of the prior art does not allow police to adjust system response quickly and remotely to compensate for changes in road conditions that might make driving more hazardous, such as adverse weather or traffic congestion. The most valuable system to prevent collisions will integrate and synchronize with traditional traffic control devices and systems such as using the red, green, and yellow status of the traffic light signals as input to govern system response. This capability ensures that the Collision Avoidance System reinforces the traffic laws within the environment in which it is installed.
Most of the prior art is reactionary because a vehicle has to actually commit a speeding violation before the prior art system provides the intended function. This invention newly defines collision prevention by anticipating potential collisions. For example, pedestrians are protected in situations in which the sight of the pedestrian and the operator are restricted as they both proceed toward an intersection and a possible collision is forthcoming.
Real-time notification of collisions and the contributing violations are documented and transmitted directly to patrolling police and emergency medical personnel. This feedback is also not a part of the prior art. The most effective prevention of collisions must employ automatic and self-adjustment to the changing conditions within the monitored environment and do so 24 hours a day. None of the prior art provides this capability for many reasons including the fact that none of the prior art monitors the environment where a collision might occur. Thus the Collision Avoidance System allows efficient traffic, defined as the safest traffic at the fastest speed.
None of the prior art and patents, taken either singularly or in combination, is seen to describe the instant invention as claimed. Thus a system is desired to prevent vehicular collisions with other vehicles, pedestrians, trains, and stationary objects by monitoring, controlling, documenting, and reporting the vehicle's speed and position.